
note-taking
by houfu
A lightweight collection of Claude Code subagents that automate the entire lifecycle of a Ghost blog post
SKILL.md
name: Note Taking description: Record discussions in the posts folder on an ongoing basis when requested to, or at the end of significant events, like brainstorming, generating a pitch etc
Note Taking
Overview
Maintain an audit trail of discussions, decisions, and progress for each blog post or newsletter. The discussion.md file serves two purposes:
- For Claude: Quick context to avoid repetition and maintain holistic view
- For User: Audit trail showing what Claude did, what decisions were made, and why
Core principle: Track attribution (what Claude did vs. what user decided) and outcomes (did it work?).
Announce at start: "I'm recording this discussion in discussion.md."
Success Criteria
The discussion record is complete when:
- Decision attribution is clear - Shows what Claude contributed vs. what user decided
- Cause and effect tracked - "Claude did X → User decided Y because Z"
- Outcomes documented - Did the decision work? What happened?
- Quick lookup enabled - Can find key decisions without reading full narrative
- Audit trail exists - Can trace back why any decision was made
File Structure
discussion.md follows this structure:
# Discussion Notes: [Project Name]
## AUDIT TRAIL: Key Decision Points
[Decision-by-decision record - see template below]
## WHAT CLAUDE DID (Contributions)
### Research
- [Bullet list of research performed]
### Writing
- [Bullet list of drafts, rewrites, sections created]
### Quality Control
- [Bullet list of audits, reviews, validations]
### Technical
- [Bullet list of scripts, tools, automation]
## WHAT WORKED / DIDN'T WORK
### Worked Well ✅
| What Claude Did | User Decision | Outcome |
|-----------------|---------------|---------|
| [action] | [decision] | [result] |
### Didn't Work ❌
| What Claude Did | Problem | Lesson |
|-----------------|---------|--------|
| [action] | [what failed] | [what to avoid] |
## SESSIONS (Chronological Detail)
[Full session-by-session narrative for context]
The Process
Step 1: Determine the Post Folder
- If working on existing post: locate
/posts/{post-short-title}/ - If creating new post: folder created during pitch generation
- If unsure: ask user which post this relates to
Step 2: Read Existing discussion.md
CRITICAL: Always read existing discussion.md before starting work.
When reading, extract:
- What decisions have been made (don't re-debate)
- What content is already covered (don't repeat)
- What approaches failed (don't retry)
- What Claude already contributed (build on it)
Step 3: Record the Session
Add session detail at bottom, then update top sections.
For Each Session: Add to Bottom
## Session X: [Short Title] (YYYY-MM-DD)
### Context
[Why this session happened, what triggered it]
### What Claude Did
- Research: [what research]
- Analysis: [what analysis]
- Writing: [what drafted/revised]
- Tools: [what tools/scripts created]
### User Decisions
- Decision 1: [what was decided and why]
- Decision 2: [what was decided and why]
### Outcomes
- ✅ What worked: [successes]
- ❌ What didn't: [failures]
- Files created/modified: [list]
### Next Steps
[What comes next]
For Major Decisions: Add to AUDIT TRAIL
Use this template for significant decisions:
### Decision: [Decision Title] (YYYY-MM-DD, Session X)
**Claude's Analysis:**
- [What research/analysis Claude performed]
- [What data/insights Claude provided]
- [What options Claude presented]
**Claude's Recommendation:**
[What Claude suggested and why]
**User Decision:**
[What the user actually decided]
**Rationale:**
[Why the user made this choice]
**Outcome:**
✅/❌ [What happened as a result]
Step 4: Update Top Sections
After adding session details, update:
- AUDIT TRAIL - Add major decisions with attribution
- WHAT CLAUDE DID - Add to contribution categories
- WHAT WORKED / DIDN'T WORK - Update outcome tables
Step 5: Save the Record
- Append to
/posts/{post-short-title}/discussion.md - Use Edit tool to update top sections
- Don't replace existing content - build on it
When to Use This Skill
Always use after:
- Brainstorming sessions
- Generating or revising pitches
- Significant research or feedback
- Quality control reviews
- Publishing to Ghost
- Major milestones in writing process
Also use when:
- User explicitly requests it
- Making major decisions
- Something fails or succeeds notably
- End of a series or project
Recording Decisions: Best Practices
Good decision record:
### Decision: Use "150+ hours" not "600 hours" (2025-11-03)
**Claude's Analysis:**
- Git analysis: 79 commits across 36 days
- Found error: content is automated, not manually curated
- Revised estimate: 150-200 hours based on commit patterns
**Claude's Recommendation:**
Use "over 150 hours across several months"
**User Decision:**
Approved. Changed throughout Part 1.
**Rationale:**
More honest (admits uncertainty), shows AI's impact, still significant.
**Outcome:**
✅ More credible than 600-hour claim. Readers responded well.
Bad decision record:
We decided to use 150 hours instead of 600.
(Missing: what Claude did, why decision was made, what happened)
What Makes Good Audit Trail
Capture:
- ✅ What Claude analyzed/researched
- ✅ What Claude recommended
- ✅ What user decided (might differ from recommendation!)
- ✅ Why user made that choice
- ✅ What happened as result
Avoid:
- ❌ Narrative prose without attribution
- ❌ Decisions without rationale
- ❌ Recommendations without alternatives considered
- ❌ Outcomes without assessment (worked or didn't?)
For Series Work
Additional tracking needed:
-
What's been covered - Track to avoid repetition
## WHAT'S BEEN COVERED ### Part 1 established: - Domain renewal decision - Framework: assess, identify, clarify - Zero users truth ### Part 2 established: - Three-layer architecture - Cost breakdown - Time savings -
Series state - Track what's done/pending
## SERIES STATE - Part 1: PUBLISHED (Nov 7) - Part 2a: PUBLISHED (Nov 14) - Part 2b: POSTPONED - Part 3: PUBLISHED (Nov 22) -
Cross-series lessons - What worked across all parts
## SERIES LESSONS - ✅ Research before writing (validated decisions) - ✅ Multiple reviewer perspectives - ❌ Treated parts as standalone (repeated context) - ❌ Didn't read discussion.md first
Files in This Skill
SKILL.md(this file) - Main skill instructionsdecision-template.md- Template for recording decisionssession-template.md- Template for recording sessions
Remember
For Claude:
- Read discussion.md FIRST before any work
- Extract what's covered to avoid repetition
- Check what failed to avoid retrying
For User (audit trail):
- Show what Claude did that led to decisions
- Attribute clearly (Claude's work vs. User's choice)
- Track outcomes (worked or didn't?)
- Enable tracing: "Why did we decide X?" → full path visible
For both:
- Decisions need context and rationale
- Outcomes need assessment
- Lessons learned feed improvement
The goal: Create an audit trail showing what Claude contributed, what decisions resulted, and whether they worked.
スコア
総合スコア
リポジトリの品質指標に基づく評価
SKILL.mdファイルが含まれている
ライセンスが設定されている
100文字以上の説明がある
GitHub Stars 100以上
3ヶ月以内に更新がある
10回以上フォークされている
オープンIssueが50未満
プログラミング言語が設定されている
1つ以上のタグが設定されている
レビュー
レビュー機能は近日公開予定です